You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Ah, there's your problem, LOL -- if you are an INTP, you probably just didn't fit into their stereotypical clique.

Did you take the online Keirsey Temperament Sorter?

If I recall correctly I read PUM II when I thought I was an INTP and had just joined INTPc. I think I did the sorter and got INTP, I also had my parents do it and they both got ISTJ.

Before I found the INTPc forum I had found and read the great big INTP description on the main INTP Central page and thought it was eerily accurate. Several "how the fuck do you know that?" moments. My initial, pure, virginal impression, having had no contact with or knowledge of MBTI or real INTPs was that I was an INTP.

If I recall correctly I read PUM II when I thought I was an INTP and had just joined INTPc. I think I did the sorter and got INTP, I also had my parents do it and they both got ISTJ.

Before I found the INTPc forum I had found and read the great big INTP description on the main INTP Central page and thought it was eerily accurate. Several "how the fuck do you know that?" moments. My initial, pure, virginal impression, having had no contact with or knowledge of MBTI or real INTPs was that I was an INTP.

Based on this data, I'd say you're an INTP, just not an INTPc INTP.

In my experience over there, they seem to doubt anyone's INTP type if they do not adhere to their personal idea of what an INTP should be (it's pretty much the same deal at any type-specific forum). If you look at the Keirsey descriptions of any of the Rational types or even Please Understand Me II, nowhere does it say that they are philosophers, mathematicians, or scientists, per say -- those are merely generalities that a number of people seem to take literally.

It's true that when N and T combine, it results in a strategic intellect. The Rational type is never directly described in terms of being scientific, rather their approach to life is strategic and concerned with efficiency above all else. Hence, they are pragmatic. This same sort of strategic intellect is applied not just to the sciences, but to any profession the NT's mind is set on. Same with any other temperament.

I don't think you should dismiss what that sorter says. And apparently, the KTS and MBTI are correlated. They ask the same kinds of questions. I think the real reason MBTI practitioners are critical of the KTS because the KTS is free and draws MBTI customers away.

I think INTP is the closest you get to a type based on what I've read both here and over at intpc, sass. You have INTJ tendencies and ISTx on occasion, but you still seem closer to INTP. The other tendencies just mean you're more balanced.

I have arms for a fucking reaosn, so come hold me. Then we'll fuvk! Whoooooh! - GZA

Behavioral analysis is the surest method -- everything else is the comparison of theoretical values, many of them set in symmetry that could very well be arbitrary.

Strip away the "intuitive sensing thinking judger" or function orders, and one may have a temperament that has been evident in several people known over the years. It's one reason why I tend to use the Enneagram as a final determinant of the general personality, or to distinguish between subtypes that are apparent with some MBTI types.

ISTPs, for example, are people that I've known all my life and, intelligent or average, every single one has behaved, had talents and held values that were remarkably similar. Very few of them could be considered disorganized, each was extraordinarily particular and most of them had adjusted to a level of punctuality required in the working world; their nature of perceiving isn't effectively gauged by most tests.

I truthfully don't think anyone here is mistyped, especially considering that the type owner is more aware of his cognitive functioning than anyone else. What amounts afterward is what stereotype people put themselves into.

It's just a four-letter code that is supposed to be formed out of a test, not the often inaccurate description that follows.

I think people place too much emphasis on the behavior aspects and not enough on the person's own method of thought processing, which are not necessarily alike.